No abstract
In order to isolate, theoretically, the vital mechanisms that constrain women as citizens in Western, democratic societies, it is necessary to go beyond explanations in terms of work, into sexuality However, it is not the practice of sexual coercion which, though a serious wrong, is fundamental in subordinating women in the formally free society; it is rather the freely given—and taken—love. Furthermore, if scrutinizing pre‐democratic, anti‐feminist arguments can help to reveal the situation today, it is the utilitarian view of women's sexual resources, rather than arguments about sexually differentiated—and inferior female—nature, which is crucial. Secondly, the concept of ‘difference’, now so popular among feminist writers, is important, especially when used empirically to avoid oversimplifying unity thinking about each of the sex/gender groups. But it is not tit for conceiving the power transactions going on in the socio‐sexual process Furthermore. I suppose that one of the most important tasks of feminism is to balance the weights of (different) individuality and collectivity to mutually developmental values. Thirdly, women want more than ‘equal chances’, something other than ‘equal results’, and the ‘different but equally valuable’ must, to be women‐worthy, be defined by women themselves. In a democratic society, if women are to be full and equal members, as leaders and led, then women and men have to be openly accepted as two fundamental, interested parties in society Finally, women should not claim this citizen status first and foremost as mothers, but simply as women. i e. as female, social ‘incarnate subjects’.
In this article I summarize some main points from a larger study which I am doing on theoretical conceptualization of the formal/equal patriarchy of today Although I see myself as a socialist feminist, applying historical materialist method to feminist questions, I am critical of contemporary socialist feminist theory for not taking the issues raised by radical feminists seriously enough; for clinging too closely to the specific Marxian prob lematique of political economy and class, and for not stating the basic problem as one of power transactions in the relationship between women and men as socio-sexual beings My position is that in order to develop a feminist theory of patriarchy, we must transcend the 'field of knowledge' of economy, class and work much more decisively than the socialist feminist theory of today does We must establish a specific theoretical problematique ( field of knowledge), that of 'political sexuality', socio-sexual relationship, and love In doing this we can very well use historical materialism as guiding threads' Characterizing patnarchy as a political sex/gender system, the core of my theory is constructed in terms of a specific sex/gender exploitation, which is essentially non-economic but social and human-matenal.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.